Lead levels in fortified wines

Abstract

AIM: The main lead exposure route is the intake of contaminated food, water, and alcoholic beverages, in particular wine. At the gastric level, Pb is transformed into a soluble compound which, when conveyed into the bloodstream, is the long-term cause of saturnism, intoxication with neurotoxic, nephrotoxic and hematopoietic effects, and with the neurological developmental delay of children. Pb is classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a 2A class, possible carcinogenic to humans. In an opinion on possible health risks, CONTAM considered that cereals, vegetables, drinking water, and wine give a greater contribute to dietary exposure to Pb in Europe. Large quantities of wine, beer, and other alcoholic products drinking can increase daily Pb intake above the maximum permitted levels. The JECFA/WHO committee defined a Provisional Tolerable Weekly Intake (PTWI) for lead of 25 µg/kg body weight for all age groups. The presence of lead in grapes, wines and other alcoholic products has been reported for many years and is influenced by a series of factors that characterize wineries (country of origin, different climatic conditions, grape cultivars, soil composition, environmental industrial emissions of lead, historical and present, motor vehicle exhausts gases, metal-based fungicides and insecticides, fertilizers and winemaking processes, including cellar equipment). The aim of this work was to detect the Pb content in fortified wines from central Italy, in particular from Abruzzo.

METHODS: The analysis was performed in ICP-MS. The wine samples were diluted ten times with HNO3 (2%) and analyzed in triplicate. The external standard method and the calibration solutions prepared in 2% ethanol/2% HNO3 were used for the quantification of Pb. The data obtained was analyzed using the ICP-MS ChemStation.

RESULTS: The results of a study conducted on the trace elements presence, including Pb, in Italian fortified wines agree with the literature data relating to the Pb content, which is lower than the limit allowed by current legislation, with the exception of a sample relating to the “Vino cotto”, of artisanal production.

CONCLUSIONS:

These results can contribute to the formation of a database to protect the consumers health. The wines Pb content is established by the Commission regulation (EU) 2015/1005 of 25 June 2015 which defines the maximum admitted value at 0.15 mg/L. The International Organization of Vine and Wine (OIV) in 2020 reduced the limit to 0.10 mg/L for wines and 0.15 mg/L for fortified wines.

DOI:

Publication date: September 15, 2021

Issue: Macrowine 2021

Type: Article

Authors

Angelo Cichelli

Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences – DiSMOB. “G. D’Annunzio” University of Chieti-Pescara – Via dei Vestini, Chieti, Italy.,Laura CASORRI, Department of Technological Innovations and safety of plants, products and anthropic settlements (DIT) – National Institute for Insurance against Accidents at Work (INAIL). Rome, Italy.  Ada CONSALVO Center for Advances Studies and Technologies (CAST) University “G. d’Annunzio” of Chieti-Pescara, Italy.  Marco DI LUIGI, Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Epidemiology and Hygiene – National Institute for Insurance against Accidents at Work (INAIL) – Research Centre Monte Porzio Catone – Rome, Italy.  Massimo DI MARTINO, Ispettorato Centrale della tutela della Qualita’ e della Repressione Frodi dei prodotti agroalimentari (ICQRF). Pescara, Italy.  Barbara FICOCIELLO, Department of Technological Innovations and safety of plants, products and anthropic settlements (DIT) – National Institute for Insurance against Accidents at Work (INAIL). Rome, Italy.  Eva MASCIARELLI, Department of Technological Innovations and safety of plants, products and anthropic settlements (DIT) – National Institute for Insurance against Accidents at Work (INAIL). Rome, Italy.

Contact the author

Keywords

lead, fortified wine, maximum value, oiv

Citation

Related articles…

Underpinning terroir with data: rethinking the zoning paradigm

Agriculture, natural resource management and the production and sale of products such as wine are increasingly data-driven activities. Thus, the use of remote and proximal crop and soil sensors to aid management decisions is becoming commonplace and ‘Agtech’ is proliferating commercially; mapping, underpinned by geographical information systems and complex methods of spatial analysis, is widely used. Likewise, the chemical and sensory analysis of wines draws on multivariate statistics; the efficient winery intake of grapes, subsequent production of wines and their delivery to markets relies on logistics; whilst the sales and marketing of wines is increasingly driven by artificial intelligence linked to the recorded purchasing behaviour of consumers. In brief, there is data everywhere!

Opinions will vary on whether these developments are a good thing. Those concerned with the ‘mystique’ of wine, or the historical aspects of terroir and its preservation, may find them confronting. In contrast, they offer an opportunity to those interested in the biophysical elements of terroir, and efforts aimed at better understanding how these impact on vineyard performance and the sensory attributes of resultant wines. At the previous Terroir Congress, we demonstrated the potential of analytical methods used at the within-vineyard scale in the development of Precision Viticulture, in contributing to a quantitative understanding of regional terroir. For this conference, we take this approach forward with examples from contrasting locations in both the northern and southern hemispheres. We show how, by focussing on the vineyards within winegrowing regions, as opposed to all of the land within those regions, we might move towards a more robust terroir zoning than one derived from a mixture of history, thematic mapping, heuristics and the whims of marketers. Aside from providing improved understanding by underpinning terroir with data, such methods should also promote improved management of the entire wine value chain.

Using δ13C and hydroscapes as a tool for discriminating cultivar specific drought response

Measurement of carbon isotope discrimination in berry juice sugars at maturity (δ13C) provides an integrated assessment of water use efficiency (WUE) during the period of berry ripening, and when collected over multiple seasons can be used as an indication of drought stress response. Berry juice δ13C measurements were carried out on 48 different varieties planted in a common garden experiment in Bordeaux, France from 2014 through 2021 and were paired with midday and predawn leaf water potential measurements on the same vines in a subset of six varieties. The aim was to discriminate a large panel of varieties based on their stomatal behaviour and potentially identify hydraulic traits characterizing drought tolerance by comparing δ13C and hydroscapes (the visualisation of plant stomatal behaviour as a response to predawn water potential). Cluster analysis found that δ13C values are likely affected by the differing phenology of each variety, resulting in berry ripening of different varieties taking place under different stress conditions within the same year. We accounted for these phenological differences and found that cluster analysis based on specific δ13C metrics created a classification of varieties that corresponds well to our current empirical understanding of their relative drought tolerances. In addition, we analysed the water potential regulation of the subset of six varieties (using the hydroscape approach) and found that it was well correlated with some δ13C metrics. Surprisingly, a variety’s water potential regulation (specifically its minimum critical leaf water potential under water deficit) was strongly correlated to δ13C values under well-watered conditions, suggesting that base WUE may have a stronger impact on drought tolerance than WUE under water deficit. These results give strong insights on the innate WUE of a very large panel of varieties and suggest that studies of drought tolerance should include traits expressed under non-limiting conditions.

Making sense of available information for climate change adaptation and building resilience into wine production systems across the world

Effects of climate change on viticulture systems and winemaking processes are being felt across the world. The IPCC 6thAssessment Report concluded widespread and rapid changes have occurred, the scale of recent changes being unprecedented over many centuries to many thousands of years. These changes will continue under all emission scenarios considered, including increases in frequency and intensity of hot extremes, heatwaves, heavy precipitation and droughts. Wine companies need tools and models allowing to peer into the future and identify the moment for intervention and measures for mitigation and/or avoidance. Previously, we presented conceptual guidelines for a 5-stage framework for defining adaptation strategies for wine businesses. That framework allows for direct comparison of different solutions to mitigate perceived climate change risks. Recent global climatic evolution and multiple reports of severe events since then (smoke taint, heatwave and droughts, frost, hail and floods, rising sea levels) imply urgency in providing effective tools to tackle the multiple perceived risks. A coordinated drive towards a higher level of resilience is therefore required. Recent publications such as the Australian Wine Future Climate Atlas and results from projects such as H2020 MED-GOLD inform on expected climate change impacts to the wine sector, foreseeing the climate to expect at regional and vineyard scale in coming decades. We present examples of practical application of the Climate Change Adaptation Framework (CCAF) to impacts affecting wine production in two wine regions: Barossa (Australia) and Douro (Portugal). We demonstrate feasibility of the framework for climate adaptation from available data and tools to estimate historical climate-induced profitability loss, to project it in the future and to identify critical moments when disruptions may occur if timely measures are not implemented. Finally, we discuss adaptation measures and respective timeframes for successful mitigation of disruptive risk while enhancing resilience of wine systems.

Grapevine yield estimation in a context of climate change: the GraY model

Grapevine yield is a key indicator to assess the impacts of climate change and the relevance of adaptation strategies in a vineyard landscape. At this scale, a yield model should use a number of parameters and input data in relation to the information available and be able to reproduce vineyard management decisions (e.g. soil and canopy management, irrigation). In this study, we used data from six experimental sites in Southern France (cv. Syrah) to calibrate a model of grapevine yield limited by water constraint (GraY). Each yield component (bud fertility, number of berries per bunch, berry weight) was calculated as a function of the soil water availability simulated by the WaLIS water balance model at critical phenological phases. The model was then evaluated in 10 grapegrowers’ plots, covering a diversity of biophysical and technical contexts (soil type, canopy size, irrigation, cover crop). We identified three critical periods for yield formation: after flowering on the previous year for the number of bunches and berries, around pre-veraison and post-veraison of the same year for mean berry weight. Yields were simulated with a model efficiency (EF) of 0.62 (NRMSE = 0.28). Bud fertility and number of berries per bunch were more accurately simulated (EF = 0.90 and 0.77, NRMSE = 0.06 and 0.10, respectively) than berry weight (EF = -0.31, NRMSE = 0.17). Model efficiency on the on-farm plots reached 0.71 (NRMSE = 0.37) simulating yields from 1 to 8 kg/plant. The GraY model is an original model estimating grapevine yield evolution on the basis of water availability under future climatic conditions.  It allows to evaluate the effects of various adaptation levers such as planting density, cover crop management, fruit/leaf ratio, shading and irrigation, in various production contexts.

Impact of geographical location on the phenolic profile of minority varieties grown in Spain. II: red grapevines

Because terroir and cultivar are drivers of wine quality, is essential to investigate theirs effects on polyphenolic profile before promoting the implantation of a red minority variety in a specific area. This work, included in MINORVIN project, focuses in the polyphenolic profile of 7 red grapevines minority varieties of Vitis vinifera L. (Morate, Sanguina, Santafe, Terriza Tinta Jeromo Tortozona Tinta) and Tempranillo) from six typical viticulture Spanish areas: Aragón (A1), Cataluña (A2), Castilla la Mancha (A3), Castilla –León (A4), Madrid (A5) and Navarra (A6) of 2020 season. Polyphenolic substances were extracted from grapes. 35 compounds were identified and quantified (mg subtance/kg fresh berry) by HPLC and grouped in anthocyanins (ANT) flavanols (FLAVA), flavonols (FLAVO), hydroxycinnamic (AH), benzoic (BA) acids and stilbenes (ST). Antioxidant activity (AA, mmol TE /g fresh berry) was determined by DPPH method. The results were submitted to a two-way ANOVA to investigate the influence of variety, area and their interaction for each polyphenolic family and cluster analysis was used to construct hierarchical dendrograms, searching the natural groupings among the samples. Sanguina (A3) had the most of total polyphenols while Tempranillo (A5) those of ANT. Sanguina (A2) and (A3) reached the highest values of FLAVO, FLAVA and AA. These two last samples had also the maximum of AA. The effect cultivar and area were significant for all polyphenolic families analyzed. A high variability due to variety (>50%) was observed in FLAVA and the maximum value of variability due to growing area was detected in AA (86.41%), ANT and FLAVO (51%); the interaction variety*zone was significant only for ANT, FLAVO, EST and AA. Finally, dendrograms presented five cluster: i) Sanguina (A2); ii) Sanguina (A3); iii) Tempranillo (A5); iv) Tempranillo (A3); Terriza (A3,A5), Morate (A5,A6); v) Santafé (A1,A6); Tortozona tinta (A1,A3,A6); Tinta Jeromo (A3,A4).